【摘要】：目的:采用Meta分析方法對(duì)自鎖托槽與傳統(tǒng)托槽尖牙遠(yuǎn)中移動(dòng)的速率進(jìn)行比較并評(píng)價(jià)。方法:在Cochrane Labrary,Web of Science,MEDLINE,EMBASE、Pub Med、中國(guó)學(xué)術(shù)期刊網(wǎng)全文數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)(CNKI)、萬(wàn)方、Google學(xué)術(shù)等中外文數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)檢索2017年3月之前發(fā)表的關(guān)于自鎖托槽與傳統(tǒng)托槽的尖牙遠(yuǎn)中移動(dòng)速率的隨機(jī)對(duì)照臨床研究,對(duì)納入的文獻(xiàn)按照《Cochrane協(xié)作網(wǎng)系統(tǒng)評(píng)價(jià)手冊(cè)》推薦的方法進(jìn)行質(zhì)量評(píng)價(jià),應(yīng)用Rev Man5.3軟件對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行Meta分析。結(jié)果:最終納入7篇隨機(jī)對(duì)照臨床研究。Meta分析結(jié)果顯示:自鎖托槽對(duì)比傳統(tǒng)托槽尖牙遠(yuǎn)中移動(dòng)速率沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義:P=0.86,(WMD=-0.01,95%CI=[-0.18,0.16]),被動(dòng)自鎖托槽相較于傳統(tǒng)托槽尖牙遠(yuǎn)中移動(dòng)速率沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異:P=0.94,(WMD=0.05,95%CI=[-0.22,0.31]),主動(dòng)自鎖托槽對(duì)比傳統(tǒng)托槽尖牙遠(yuǎn)中移動(dòng)速率也沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義:P=0.12,(WMD=-0.11,95%CI=[-0.24,0.03])。結(jié)論:正畸矯治中,目前暫無(wú)足夠的證據(jù)證明自鎖托槽較傳統(tǒng)托槽能加快尖牙遠(yuǎn)中移動(dòng)的速率。且無(wú)論是主動(dòng)自鎖或是被動(dòng)自鎖托槽,相較于傳統(tǒng)托槽尖牙遠(yuǎn)中移動(dòng)的速率也都沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異。
[Abstract]:Objective: to compare and evaluate the rate of distal movement between self-locking brackets and traditional brackets by Meta analysis. Methods: (CNKI), Wanfang, a full-text database of Cochrane Labrary,Web of Science,MEDLINE,EMBASE,Pub Med, China academic Journals Network, was used. Google academic and other Chinese and foreign language databases to retrieve a randomized controlled clinical study on the rate of distal canine movement between self-locking brackets and traditional brackets published before March 2017. According to the method recommended in the Manual of Evaluation of Cochrane Cooperative Network system, the quality of the included documents is evaluated, and the Meta analysis of the data is carried out by using Rev Man5.3 software. Results: seven randomized controlled clinical studies were included. The results of Meta analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the rate of movement of self-locking brackets in the distal distance of canine teeth compared with the traditional ones: P < 0.86 (WMD=-0.01,95%CI= [-0.180.16]). There was no significant difference in the rate of distal movement between passive and self-locking brackets compared with the traditional ones: Pao 0.94 (WMD=0.05,95%CI= [-0.22 鹵0.31]). There was also no significant difference in the rate of movement of active self-locking brackets in far canine teeth compared with the traditional ones: Pao 0.12 (WMD=-0.11,95%CI= [-0.24] 0.03]). Conclusion: in orthodontic treatment, there is not enough evidence to prove that self-locking brackets can accelerate the rate of distal canine movement. There was no statistical difference in the rate of distal movement between active and passive self-locking brackets compared with traditional brackets.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：重慶醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：R783.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 倪密;于蕾;陳文靜;;自鎖托槽與傳統(tǒng)托槽早期遠(yuǎn)中移動(dòng)尖牙速度的對(duì)比研究[J];口腔材料器械雜志;2016年02期

2 李心怡;孔衛(wèi)東;;自鎖托槽與傳統(tǒng)托槽相比對(duì)牙周狀況影響的Meta分析[J];臨床口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2015年03期

3 唐林;趙紅艷;孫婷婷;劉純純;;自鎖托槽與普通直絲托槽矯治中尖牙遠(yuǎn)移速度的比較[J];臨床口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2014年11期

4 顧月光;趙春洋;馬俊青;張彥;王林;;主動(dòng)、被動(dòng)自鎖托槽摩擦力的meta分析研究[J];口腔醫(yī)學(xué);2012年05期

5 田佳靈;劉雅莉;楊克虎;葛振林;;自鎖托槽矯治錯(cuò)畸形療效的系統(tǒng)評(píng)價(jià)[J];實(shí)用口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2010年06期

6 姜若萍;;自鎖托槽矯治技術(shù)與高效矯治[J];中國(guó)實(shí)用口腔科雜志;2009年01期

7 張曉蕓,張靜,賈綺林,許天民;MBT~(TM)托槽系統(tǒng)矯正病例支抗磨牙的三維位置變化[J];北京大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(醫(yī)學(xué)版);2004年04期

8 王曉玲,費(fèi)敏;兩種關(guān)閉拔牙間隙方法的比較[J];臨床口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2003年01期

9 楊新海,曾祥龍;直絲弓關(guān)閉曲法和滑動(dòng)法的比較研究[J];中華口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;1999年06期

，

本文編號(hào)：2311737